Ocelo
General
Map Artist/Eastern Front enthusiast
Posts: 1,400
|
Post by Ocelo on Jan 20, 2011 18:29:05 GMT 1
A fiasco? Each unit has at least 2 or 3 start commands and sometimes up to 9! You cannot imagine how much time was put in that and in difference to a lot of maps (where f.e. 30 tanks are given only one start command to only one point on the map looks more ridicule to me than a soldier keep hanging on due to the distance). I do not doubt the map took a while to make, most good maps do. But I am saying that if you wish to at least accurately portray the combatants (if not the locations), you should invest more in ensuring that such combined arms attacks do take place if you want to replicate them. I am well aware of the poorly made maps you mentioned, which is relevant, but we are aiming for better maps, hence why I am suggesting improvements to the current ones. Combined arms doctrine was most stressed and employed by the Red Army whenever possible. It really works, which is why IMO it could take the place of some of the units on the map in terms of difficulty, ie: making sure the infantry and tanks stay together, and have good artillery and air support, less units will be needed. Hence, in addition to improving the armor/infantry coordination, I'd suggest adding more enemy artillery to the map. I'd particularly suggest using a Zis-3 divisional gun (>100,000 made) for the purpose; there is one in the 7.5 patch for GZM. Again, that is if you wish to replicate a Red Army offensive more accurately which, IMO is very important for the mod. For example, the chapter on Korsun Pocket is well made, but on a number of the maps, the Red Army attacks are terribly replicated. From the map size and orientation, one can tell that the mapper planned to put the player in a bloodbath (particularly of the enemy), and paid insufficient attention to allocate well-placed and partly protected positions from which the enemy could provide some form of artillery support to the infantry attacks. It doesn't mean the map is terrible, but does indicate that a greater focus on accuracy is highly needed to improve gameplay. The same is just as true for others making maps about major offensives on the Eastern Front; the quality of the attacks is more important than numbers, for both sides. Of course, read up and don't give the attacking side a lot of artillery/tank/air support if they were historically unavailable. If you don't find enough info, assume moderate presence.
|
|
kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Jan 23, 2011 12:29:45 GMT 1
My sencere apologies that i have failed to please you and could not fulfil your wishes, milord. Whiplash me at least 50x, mapper King, for i deserve no less...
|
|
Ocelo
General
Map Artist/Eastern Front enthusiast
Posts: 1,400
|
Post by Ocelo on Jan 23, 2011 18:32:51 GMT 1
Well, these are just suggestions on improving your work. I am not saying you did a bad job, I am saying there is room for improvement in some respects, which would not only improve the individual maps, but also the gameplay of the mod itself. You can just as easily choose to ignore them; I posted them for the benefit of all mappers of similar scenarios. I often revise my own maps, at times with the suggestion of others (not very often because not many people provide constructive advice- or much feedback at all these days).
|
|
kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Feb 3, 2011 22:20:05 GMT 1
i'm always open for suggestions, which indeed come very rare nowadays, however calling it a "fiasco" sounds more offending to me rather than constructive. we both know the real reason and i can only wonder what would happen if i called your map a fiasco, but ok.
whether you like or dislike the map, i have tried to achieve a different gameplay, in which one barely survives, unless one slows down the enemy. i disagree with your remark about chaotic squads/troops, while they carry more start command (or script commands) than i have ever seen in 98% of all the other maps. i have tested the map(s) a dozen times to find and narrow the point of winning. it had to be apocalyptic, right?
sure there is room for improvement, but it could have been communicated in another/different way also.
|
|
Ocelo
General
Map Artist/Eastern Front enthusiast
Posts: 1,400
|
Post by Ocelo on Feb 4, 2011 16:14:32 GMT 1
I have not said that the map itself is a fiasco, I said that the enemy attacks in it turn into a fiasco. I'm not saying the map can't or shouldn't be difficult, I'm just suggesting to make it that way by means of quality of attacks, rather than quantity of attacking units. I'm sure a mission attempting to depict a battle of this scale/intensity is complex, but its not impossible (a few other maps depict this), which is why I suggested improving the timing and composition of the attacks.
|
|
kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Feb 4, 2011 19:26:52 GMT 1
Guys, I lost the track of this argue, but have tried to use the command Cmd(3, "scriptunitnumber", GetScriptAreaParams("scriptarea"));; I learnt it in stalingrad scripts and runs very, very well, Yes, i have also experimented with this (in later maps), but not in the particular map, because of the map's size and the fact the attack takes places over the whole length of the map. I know, i could have devided it into more area's, but at this point, i don't see a difference between coordinates or area parameters.I have not said that the map itself is a fiasco, I said that the enemy attacks in it turn into a fiasco. I'm not saying the map can't or shouldn't be difficult, I'm just suggesting to make it that way by means of quality of attacks, rather than quantity of attacking units. I'm sure a mission attempting to depict a battle of this scale/intensity is complex, but its not impossible (a few other maps depict this), which is why I suggested improving the timing and composition of the attacks. If you would have taken a closer look into the lua file, you would have noticed the various timings on reinfs etc.. Also the lots of triggers. Concerning the quantity, it is simply how i wanted to push back the player, but i seem to talk to a wall here and i'm not gonna keep repeating myself. I never intented to create Dimitry M. maps; on the contrary.
You do have the right to critisize, dislike or have whatever opinion about the map(s), but in case i wouldn't like your map(s), you won't hear me punching under the belly (if that's a correct expression).
|
|
|
Post by LouisXIV on Jun 24, 2011 12:06:34 GMT 1
One thing I have noticed. On some maps there are rectangular areas that are huge, but I haven't figured out how to do that yet. Larger script areas could be very useful in some cases.
If I go into the MapEd Map Tools area and try to create a rectangular or circular Script Area Tool, I can only stretch it out as wide as my screen. If I move the screen view, I can't pick up the edge of the area I've already created; it wants to create a new area.
So what trick am I missing to create larger areas? What happens if I overlay an new area on part of an old one with the same name? (I haven't tried that one yet.)
|
|
Ocelo
General
Map Artist/Eastern Front enthusiast
Posts: 1,400
|
Post by Ocelo on Jun 25, 2011 0:15:51 GMT 1
Louis, when you create a new map, the screen allows you to set the map length/width. Just uncheck the "square map" box.
|
|
kaoz
General
inter faesces et urinam nascimur
Posts: 1,109
|
Post by kaoz on Jun 30, 2011 17:49:22 GMT 1
On some maps there are rectangular areas that are huge, but I haven't figured out how to do that yet. If I go into the MapEd Map Tools area and try to create a rectangular or circular Script Area Tool, I can only stretch it out as wide as my screen. In the MapEditor you can use your keyboard arrows to scroll the screen... so... when rectangular selected, start dragging and use the arrows to scroll (into the correct direction).
I haven't had problems with area's within area's but i wouldn't give them the same name tho'... sounds like evoking trouble to me!
|
|